Assessment of stress/strain in dental implants and abutments of alternative materials compared to conventional titanium alloy—3D non-linear finite element analysis

References

• Akça K, Eser A, Çavuşoğlu Y, Sağırkaya E, Çehreli MC. 2015. Numerical assessment of bone remodeling around conventionally and early loaded titanium and titanium-zirconium alloy dental implants. Med Biol Eng Comput. 53(5):453–462.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alves CC, Neves M. 2009. Tapered implants: from indications to advantages. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 29(2):161–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atieh MA, Shahmiri RA. 2013. Evaluation of optimal taper of immediately loaded wide-diameter implants: a finite element analysis. J Oral Implantol. 39(2):123–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballo AM, Cekic-Nagas I, Ergun G, Lassila L, Palmquist A, Borchardt P, Lausmaa J, Thomsen P, Vallittu PK, Närhi TO. 2014. Osseointegration of fiber-reinforced composite implants: histological and ultrastructural observations. Dent Mater. 30(12):e384–e395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartolomeu F, Buciumeanu M, Costa MM, Alves N, Gasik M, Silva FS, Miranda G. 2019. Multi-material Ti6Al4V & PEEK cellular structures produced by selective laser melting and hot pressing: a tribocorrosion study targeting orthopedic applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 89:54–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bataineh K, Al Janaideh M. 2019. Effect of different biocompatible implant materials on the mechanical stability of dental implants under excessive oblique load. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 21(6):1206–1217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunski JB. 1999. In vivo bone response to biomechanical loading at the bone/dental-implant interface. Adv Dent Res. 13(1):99–119.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Çaglar A, Bal BT, Karakoca S, Aydın C, Yılmaz H, Sarısoy S. 2011. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of titanium and yttrium-stabilized zirconium dioxide abutments and implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26(5):961–969.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calì M, Zanetti EM, Oliveri SM, Asero R, Ciaramella S, Martorelli M, Bignardi C. 2018. Influence of thread shape and inclination on the biomechanical behaviour of plateau implant systems. Dent Mater. 34(3):460–469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter RD, Klosterhoff BS, Torstrick FB, Foley KT, Burkus JK, Lee CSD, Gall K, Guldberg RE, Safranski DL. 2018. Effect of porous orthopaedic implant material and structure on load sharing with simulated bone ingrowth: A finite element analysis comparing titanium and PEEK. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 80:68–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan Y-H, Lew W-Z, Lu E, Loretz T, Lu L, Lin C-T, Feng S-W. 2018. An evaluation of the biocompatibility and osseointegration of novel glass fiber reinforced composite implants: In vitro and in vivo studies. Dent Mater. 34(3):470–485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cionca N, Hashim D, Mombelli A. 2017. Zirconia dental implants: where are we now, and where are we heading. Periodontology 2000. 73(1):241–258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho PG, Jimbo R, Tovar N, Bonfante EA. 2015. Osseointegration: hierarchical designing encompassing the macrometer, micrometer, and nanometer length scales. Dent Mater. 31(1):37–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cordeiro JM, Beline T, Ribeiro ALR, Rangel EC, da Cruz NC, Landers R, Faverani LP, Vaz LG, Fais LMG, Vicente FB, et al. 2017. Development of binary and ternary titanium alloys for dental implants. Dent Mater. 33(11):1244–1257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Andrade CL, Carvalho MA, Del Bel Cury AA, Sotto-Maior BS. 2016. Biomechanical effect of prosthetic connection and implant body shape in low-quality bone of maxillary posterior single implant-supported restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 31(4):e92–e97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deeksha S, Regish K, Anoop N, Prithviraj D. 2012. A systematic review of zirconia as an implant material. Indian J Dent Res. 23(5):643–649.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dos Santos MBF, Meloto G, de O, Bacchi A, Correr-Sobrinho L. 2017. Stress distribution in cylindrical and conical implants under rotational micromovement with different boundary conditions and bone properties: 3-D FEA. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 20(8):893–900.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eraslan O, Inan O. 2010. The effect of thread design on stress distribution in a solid screw implant: A 3D finite element analysis. Clin Oral Invest. 14(4):411–416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falco A, Berardini M, Trisi P. 2018. Correlation between implant geometry, implant surface, insertion torque, and primary stability: in vitro biomechanical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 33(4):824–830.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fetner M, Fetner A, Koutouzis T, Clozza E, Tovar N, Sarendranath A, Coelho PG, Neiva K, Janal MN, Neiva R. 2015. The effects of subcrestal implant placement on crestal bone levels and bone-to-abutment contact: a microcomputed tomographic and histologic study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30(5):1068–1075.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filho C, Faot F, Madruga MM, Marcello-Machado RM, Bordin D, Del Bel Cury AA. 2019. Effect of implant macrogeometry on peri-implant healing outcomes: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Invest. 23(2):567–575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fretwurst T, Nelson K, Tarnow DP, Wang H-L, Giannobile WV. 2018. Is metal particle release associated with peri-implant bone destruction? An emerging concept. J Dent Res. 97(3):259–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K, Kan JY. 2003. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 90(2):121–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermann F, Lerner H, Palti A. 2007. Factors influencing the preservation of the periimplant marginal bone. Implant Dent. 16(2):165–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iegami CM, Uehara PN, Sesma N, Pannuti CM, Tortamano Neto P, Mukai MK. 2017. Survival rate of titanium-zirconium narrow diameter dental implants versus commercially pure titanium narrow diameter dental implants: A systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 19(6):1015–1022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaleli N, Sarac D, Külünk S, Öztürk Ö. 2018. Effect of different restorative crown and customized abutment materials on stress distribution in single implants and peripheral bone: a three-dimensional finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent. 119(3):437–445.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korabi R, Shemtov-Yona K, Rittel D. 2017. On stress/strain shielding and the material stiffness paradigm for dental implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 19(5):935–943.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee W-T, Koak J-Y, Lim Y-J, Kim S-K, Kwon H-B, Kim M-J. 2012. Stress shielding and fatigue limits of poly-ether-ether-ketone dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater. 100(4):1044–1052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Yang C, Zhao H, Qu S, Li X, Li Y. 2014. New developments of Ti-based alloys for biomedical applications. Mater (Basel, Switzerland) 7(3):1709–1800.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mircheski I, Gradišar M. 2016. 3D finite element analysis of porous Ti-based alloy prostheses. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 19(14):1531–1540.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Misch CE. 1990. Density of bone: effect on treatment plans, surgical approach, healing, and progressive boen loading. Int J Oral Implantol. 6(2):23–31.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Misch CE. 2008. Stress treatment theorem for implant dentistry. In: Misch CE editor. Contemporary implant dentistry, 3rd ed. St Louis, Missouri: Elsevier; p. 68–91.
   Google Scholar
• Moraschini V, Poubel LDC, Ferreira VF, Barboza EDS. 2015. Evaluation of survival and success rates of dental implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 10 years: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 44(3):377–388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mosavar A, Ziaei A, Kadkhodaei M. 2015. The effect of implant thread design on stress distribution in anisotropic bone with different osseointegration conditions: a finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 30(6):1317–1326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Najeeb S, Khurshid Z, Zohaib S, Sohail Zafar M. 2016. Bioactivity and osseointegration of PEEK are inferior to those of titanium: a systematic review. J Oral Implantol. 42(6):512–516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nickenig H-J, Wichmann M, Schlegel KA, Nkenke E, Eitner S. 2009. Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone levels adjacent to parallel-screw cylinder machined-neck implants and rough-surfaced microthreaded implants using digitized panoramic radiographs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 20(6):550–554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oh T-J, Yoon J, Misch CE, Wang H-L. 2002. The causes of early implant bone loss: myth or science? J Periodontol. 73(3):322–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pieralli S, Kohal RJ, Jung RE, Vach K, Spies BC. 2017. Clinical outcomes of zirconia dental implants: a systematic review. J Dent Res. 96(1):38–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roehling S, Schlegel KA, Woelfler H, Gahlert M. 2018. Performance and outcome of zirconia dental implants in clinical studies: a meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 16(suppl 29):135–153.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp F, Liang L, Geis-Gerstorfer J, Scheideler L, Hüttig F. 2018. Surface characteristics of dental implants: A review. Dent Mater. 34(1):40–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarot JR, Contar CMM, Cruz A d, de Souza Magini R. 2010. Evaluation of the stress distribution in CFR-PEEK dental implants by the three-dimensional finite element method. J Mater Sci: Mater Med. 21(7):2079–2085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwitalla A, Müller W-D. 2013. PEEK dental implants: a review of the literature. J Oral Implantol. 39(6):743–749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwitalla AD, Spintig T, Kallage I, Müller W-D. 2015. Flexural behavior of PEEK materials for dental application. Dent Mater. 31(11):1377–1384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinya A, Ballo AM, Lassila LVJ, Shinya A, Närhi TO, Vallittu PK. 2011. Stress and strain analysis of the bone-implant interface: a comparison of fiber-reinforced composite and titanium implants utilizing 3-dimensional finite element study. J Oral Implantol. 37(spec no. 1):133–140.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• SolidWorks Corp. 2010. SolidWorks. Concord, MA: SolidWorks Corp.
   Google Scholar
• Tiossi R, Vasco MAA, Lin L, Conrad HJ, Bezzon OL, Ribeiro RF, Fok A. 2013. Validation of finite element models for strain analysis of implant-supported prostheses using digital image correlation. Dent Mater. 29(7):788–796.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang L, He S, Wu X, Liang S, Mu Z, Wei J, Deng F, Deng Y, Wei S. 2014. Polyetheretherketone/nano-fluorohydroxyapatite composite with antimicrobial activity and osseointegration properties. Biomaterials. 35(25):6758–6775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winter W, Klein D, Karl M. 2013. Micromotion of dental implants: Basic mechanical considerations. J Med Eng. 2013:1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Xu J, Weng X-J, Wang X, Huang J-Z, Zhang C, Muhammad H, Ma X, Liao Q-D. 2013. Potential use of porous titanium-niobium alloy in orthopedic implants: preparation and experimental study of its biocompatibility in vitro. PLoS One. 8(11):e79289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng Y, Liu L, Xiao L, Zhang Q, Liu Y. 2019. Enhanced osteogenic activity of phosphorylated polyetheretherketone via surface-initiated grafting polymerization of vinylphosphonic acid. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 173:591–598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar